Replies

See this is an example of you seeing insults where there are none. Dicostu, your intent has nothing to do with it. Your comment is none the less insulting. You don't want it to be taken that way. You don't want to admit what it implies. I understand that. It's still insulting.

I’m people,... You are a person, that is part of a group loosely referred to as the people. I agree with that. What you have done though, separates you from the people you are trying to inform. "I know that you have access to information the jury doesn't have, and I think you need to know." Dicostu, the very mention of this places you in a pseudo superior position. I know. You don't. I understand. You don't. I am smart enough to understand what this means. You aren't. WHO DOESN'T KNOW THIS? WE ALL DO. You're not providing a service here. You're dishing out an insult. It's not really that big of a deal, but if you're going to push back when I point this out to you, it's going to look bigger and bigger and bigger. It's pointless to deny reality.

I forget that other people don’t have all the same information I have ALL THE TIME. Okay great. The problem is, EVERYONE OUT HERE KNOWS WHAT YOU KNOW. EVERYONE OUT HERE IS ABLE TO REASON WHAT YOU HAVE. NOBODY NEEDS TO BE INFORMED. NOBODY IS MAKING THE CLAIM THE JURY KNOWS EXACTLY WHAT THEY DO. WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE JURY HERE. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NORMAL PEOPLE LIKE YOU AND I. WE DON'T NEED YOUR "NEWS FLASH" THAT THE JURY DOESN'T HAVE ACCESS TO INFORMATION WE DO/DID. WE ALREADY KNOW IT, AND YOU'RE INFORMING US ABOUT THAT IS CONDESCENDING.

Actually just yesterday, I found out I’d been doing it to my wife for months. We’d been waiting for a check to come in from a lagging source, I knew it hadn’t been cut yet but because of certain timing couldn’t take the next step, somehow I had fail to properly convey that so she thought it had been cut and lost in the mail, so she thought the next step was going to be much tougher (proving we hadn’t gotten it). Yesterday the timing hit I took the next step, check is on the way all is well, but she was surprised it was that easy. Look, that's a charming story. It reveals a situaiton where you didn't tell your wife all the information. I understand that. Every member of the public is aware of what the writer and you are seeking to tell them. They all know the jury doesn't have access to the information they do. Who in the Sam Hell are your trying to inform of this commonly recognized concept? Who doesn't know this?

Look, on this forum we recognize that there are members of the public who aren't the sharpest pencils in the box. That does not mean that everyone is stupid besides you and the writer. It doesn't mean that you two need to inform us of what the jury knows vs what we know. WE ALREADY KNOW THIS. We're not some stupid dreggs of life simply because we think there was enough evidence to convict Casey Anthony, and we don't need some thought police person to come along and categorize us as people not smart enough to make reasoned determinations.

So no my tone isn’t insulting, the premise isn’t insulting, and nothing about the statement puts me (who does exactly what I described) above anybody else. All of the insult is coming from how you are deliberately choosing to read it. There’s nothing for me to “admit” for I have insulted no one. Now maybe you should admit you’re reading extra into stuff. Dicostu, is it possible for you to grasp that people are smart enough out here, to understand the same things you do, without your help? If not, then I'm sorry for you. If so, then just admit it.